<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bible FAQ</title>
	<atom:link href="http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 01:13:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: knitwitted</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-465</link>
		<dc:creator>knitwitted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-465</guid>
		<description>O excellent! Knew you&#039;d see things my way :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>O excellent! Knew you&#8217;d see things my way <img src='http://shake-speares-bible.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger Stritmatter</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-462</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Stritmatter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:59:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-462</guid>
		<description>hmmm.....I think you just did!  Thanks. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hmmm&#8230;..I think you just did!  Thanks. <img src='http://shake-speares-bible.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: knitwitted</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-461</link>
		<dc:creator>knitwitted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-461</guid>
		<description>Hi Doc,
Would you please add the eight &quot;definite themes&quot; you&#039;ve identified in the de Vere Bible that &quot;the annotator seems clearly preoccupied with&quot; to your Bible FAQs... Thanks!!

1. The responsibilities of the rich and powerful.
2. The virtue of charity.
3. The evils of usury.
4. The nature of sin.
5. Prophecy.
6. The value of secret works.
7. The nature of providence in eschatological end times.
8. The nature of proper speech.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Doc,<br />
Would you please add the eight &#8220;definite themes&#8221; you&#8217;ve identified in the de Vere Bible that &#8220;the annotator seems clearly preoccupied with&#8221; to your Bible FAQs&#8230; Thanks!!</p>
<p>1. The responsibilities of the rich and powerful.<br />
2. The virtue of charity.<br />
3. The evils of usury.<br />
4. The nature of sin.<br />
5. Prophecy.<br />
6. The value of secret works.<br />
7. The nature of providence in eschatological end times.<br />
8. The nature of proper speech.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Book That Would Be Awesome If It Would Be Written &#124; knitwitted</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-437</link>
		<dc:creator>Book That Would Be Awesome If It Would Be Written &#124; knitwitted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-437</guid>
		<description>[...] to Dr. Stritmatter for being ahead of his time and an expert in the beginnings of a little-but-yet-to-be explored [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to Dr. Stritmatter for being ahead of his time and an expert in the beginnings of a little-but-yet-to-be explored [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger Stritmatter</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-259</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Stritmatter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 12:11:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-259</guid>
		<description>Good morning, Bella. I wouldn&#039;t say that it is impossible that a Catholic would have owned a Geneva Bible, but I would also say:

1) The authorship question has, in my opinion, long since passed beyond such hypotheticals;
2) We&#039;re now looking at a particular Geneva Bible, once owned and annotated by the 17th Earl of Oxford
3) It shows many tangible and telling connections to the works of Shakespeare
4) These connections are part of a much larger pattern of connective tissue that has been developed over the last ninety years suggesting that Oxford is the real author of the canon.

Therefore, discussions about who might possibly have owned what kinds of Bible, while they may be entertaining in their own right, have little relevance to the actual fact pattern that the Oxfordians have brought forward for consideration. For further details, please consult Looney online, or find a copy of Anderson, Ogburn, etc. 

Thanks for the question!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good morning, Bella. I wouldn&#8217;t say that it is impossible that a Catholic would have owned a Geneva Bible, but I would also say:</p>
<p>1) The authorship question has, in my opinion, long since passed beyond such hypotheticals;<br />
2) We&#8217;re now looking at a particular Geneva Bible, once owned and annotated by the 17th Earl of Oxford<br />
3) It shows many tangible and telling connections to the works of Shakespeare<br />
4) These connections are part of a much larger pattern of connective tissue that has been developed over the last ninety years suggesting that Oxford is the real author of the canon.</p>
<p>Therefore, discussions about who might possibly have owned what kinds of Bible, while they may be entertaining in their own right, have little relevance to the actual fact pattern that the Oxfordians have brought forward for consideration. For further details, please consult Looney online, or find a copy of Anderson, Ogburn, etc. </p>
<p>Thanks for the question!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bella</title>
		<link>http://shake-speares-bible.com/bible-faq/comment-page-1/#comment-257</link>
		<dc:creator>bella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 02:45:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shake-speares-bible.com/?page_id=216#comment-257</guid>
		<description>It was my understanding that when Queen Elizabeth, all ( if not most variables) og the good book were allowed. So one could argue that Shakespeare (although catholic), may in fact owned a Geneva bible..what say you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was my understanding that when Queen Elizabeth, all ( if not most variables) og the good book were allowed. So one could argue that Shakespeare (although catholic), may in fact owned a Geneva bible..what say you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

